Hey Matt B ... How the hell o are you ??? :)

2nd Light Forums
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: The "Public Option" on Healthcare is a Poison Pill
Topic Summary:
Created On: 11/11/2019 08:11 AM
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
1 2 Next Last unread
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 11/11/2019 08:11 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


RustyTruck

Posts: 33294
Joined Forum: 08/02/2004

Some Democratic candidates are pushing it as a free-choice version of Medicare for All. That's good rhetoric but bad policy.

http://www.thenation.com/artic...health-care-medicare/

In our essay we describe how the appealing rhetoric of competition and choice is being wielded to protect the greed and waste of private insurance. We call attention to the record of the Medicare Advantage program, a working model of the public options approach. Despite having overhead costs almost seven times that of traditional Medicare, private Medicare Advantage plans have been able to reap enormous profits by "cherry picking" the healthiest (i.e., most profitable) seniors, "lemon dropping" the sickest (and most expensive) ones, and extracting higher premiums from Medicare by exaggerating their enrollees' illnesses through upcoding. A similarly designed public option would become a de facto high-risk pool, attracting high-need enrollees while leaving younger and healthier enrollees on private insurance.

Moreover, a public option wouldn't reduce provider and hospital administrative costs. Only a true single-payer system could fund hospitals and other facilities through annual global budgets - similar to the way cities fund fire departments - and eliminate wasteful per-patient billing. And only a single-payer system could save billions more by negotiating with pharmaceutical and device manufacturers on a national scale.

We must redouble our efforts to educate our colleagues and communities about the need for real single-payer Medicare for All. Please consider sharing this article with friends and colleagues. And remind your elected officials that only single-payer Medicare for All can achieve the efficiency and cost savings that are essential for universal care.

Onward,

Steffie Woolhandler, M.D., M.P.H., and David Himmelstein, M.D.
PNHP co-founders

-------------------------
Capitalism is based on the ridiculous notion that you can enjoy limitless growth in a closed, finite system.

In biology, such behavior of cells is called "cancer".
 11/11/2019 09:25 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


jdbman

Posts: 12159
Joined Forum: 07/28/2003

The notion that there can be "Affordable Healthcare" is bs. You get what you pay for.
Every American should have the lawful right to healthcare. In general I favor Medicare for all. I recently crossed 65 and got Medicare and supplements. This system works for me. I am still using my same Doctor's and dentist. Out of pocket is reasonable.

The math is doable. I would debate Mrs. Warren's numbers. I dont think Sanders has this put together either.

People of wealth, ( 1% s) can take care of themselves with a concierge option.

Repugs have no plan. Or the repug plan is to give no healthcare to black, brown or immigrant people. Saves lots of money and kills many more sooner.

-------------------------
So if you are a surfer I wish you the prosperity that allows you more time to pursue the salt water dream, and the true happiness that comes from warm water, clean waves and the companionship of your fellow surfers. If you are an internet troll just spewing bs then f off.
 11/11/2019 09:38 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


somebodyelse

Posts: 6770
Joined Forum: 06/29/2006

I recently crossed 65 and got Medicare and supplements. This system works for me. I am still using my same Doctor's and dentist. Out of pocket is reasonable. ...That IS the Republican Plan... Glad it's working out for you, glad out of pocket is reasonable... you're welcome, additionally to that, we plan to not let Liberals fuck it up for the other %95 of people who are planning to do Exactly the same thing you just did and found so acceptable.

-------------------------
 11/11/2019 09:50 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


RegularJoe

Posts: 3679
Joined Forum: 11/20/2011

Originally posted by: RustyTruck
We must redouble our efforts to educate our colleagues and communities about the need for real single-payer Medicare for All. Please consider sharing this article with friends and colleagues. And remind your elected officials that only single-payer Medicare for All can achieve the efficiency and cost savings that are essential for universal care.

Onward,

Steffie Woolhandler, M.D., M.P.H., and David Himmelstein, M.D.

PNHP co-founders


Was "Onward" an addition by Rusty? I don't see it in his linked text.
 11/11/2019 10:09 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


RustyTruck

Posts: 33294
Joined Forum: 08/02/2004

Originally posted by: RegularJoe

Originally posted by: RustyTruck

We must redouble our efforts to educate our colleagues and communities about the need for real single-payer Medicare for All. Please consider sharing this article with friends and colleagues. And remind your elected officials that only single-payer Medicare for All can achieve the efficiency and cost savings that are essential for universal care.



Onward,



Steffie Woolhandler, M.D., M.P.H., and David Himmelstein, M.D.



PNHP co-founders




Was "Onward" an addition by Rusty? I don't see it in his linked text.


No, it's in the introduction email from the authors.

-------------------------
Capitalism is based on the ridiculous notion that you can enjoy limitless growth in a closed, finite system.

In biology, such behavior of cells is called "cancer".
 11/11/2019 03:18 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


stokedpanda

Posts: 4226
Joined Forum: 09/04/2015

What if cheap easy stuff is covered, common cold broken bones etc covered, expensive stuff just never pay the bills they quit calling eventually lol

-------------------------
I troll 2L.com to be a better person in real life

Edited: 11/11/2019 at 03:20 PM by stokedpanda
 11/11/2019 07:13 PM
User is online View Users Profile Print this message


Cole

Posts: 68176
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

The very sick and infirm need to be removed from regular insurance and into state sponsored plans, so the healthier don't have to foot the bill. That, and a public option to add real competition.

-------------------------
I was right.
 11/12/2019 04:07 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Fish Killer

Posts: 71439
Joined Forum: 10/09/2005

Originally posted by: Cole

The very sick and infirm need to be removed from regular insurance and into state sponsored plans, so the healthier don't have to foot the bill.


Who pays for the state sponsored plans?

The taxes that come from the 'healthier' pay for these plans!

You seriously think it's FREE...just because the 'state' pays for it!

You're a serious fucking MORON!

-------------------------
The REAL truth is....both of the forum idiots are OWNED.
-BOTH of them have no clue who their owner is.
-They are both card carrying narcissists.
^These are PROVED facts.
 11/12/2019 04:54 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


RustyTruck

Posts: 33294
Joined Forum: 08/02/2004

Putting the sick into a separate group defeats the principle of insurance; it's based on pooled risk. That's why we need everyone in on a national plan, like most countries. Medicare already has a lot of the infrastructure in place, the most logical path to universal healthcare is to expand Medicare; and it's far cheaper than what we're doing now. Raise my taxes $2K and save me $5K? That's pretty easy math, even cheat could figure it out.

-------------------------
Capitalism is based on the ridiculous notion that you can enjoy limitless growth in a closed, finite system.

In biology, such behavior of cells is called "cancer".
 11/12/2019 05:11 AM
User is online View Users Profile Print this message


Cole

Posts: 68176
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

The health insurance industry is the lifeblood for millions of Americans and it pays out hundreds of billions of dollars, for that to simply vanish would be catastrophic.

-------------------------
I was right.
 11/12/2019 05:15 AM
User is online View Users Profile Print this message


Cole

Posts: 68176
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

As far as pooled risk, it's still the same principle, you just remove those that are breaking the system. It's actually a win win, costs for the masses go down and the sick can avoid the fiscal weight that leads to so many bankruptcies and financial ruin.

-------------------------
I was right.
 11/12/2019 05:16 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


RustyTruck

Posts: 33294
Joined Forum: 08/02/2004

Medicare for All includes funding to support workers transitioning, and many of them would be needed for the expansion required.

The most efficient system pools all risk, and operates at cost. Claims management and administrative overhead is drastically reduced, and the result is big savings for everyone.

-------------------------
Capitalism is based on the ridiculous notion that you can enjoy limitless growth in a closed, finite system.

In biology, such behavior of cells is called "cancer".

Edited: 11/12/2019 at 05:21 AM by RustyTruck
 11/12/2019 05:29 AM
User is online View Users Profile Print this message


Cole

Posts: 68176
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

Oh, I like the idea of Medicare for all, but it is far more fantasy than reality, especially in this political climate. Will it happen in the future? I have no doubt, but i would actually like non shitty, affordable insurance in my lifetime and there are far simpler ways of achieving it.

-------------------------
I was right.
 11/12/2019 05:31 AM
User is online View Users Profile Print this message


Cole

Posts: 68176
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

The most efficient system pools all risk, and operates at cost.

Doctors, hospitals, the Pharmaceutical Industry....at cost?

-------------------------
I was right.
 11/12/2019 05:47 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Sniper

Posts: 8759
Joined Forum: 09/24/2003

Originally posted by: RustyTruck

Putting the sick into a separate group defeats the principle of insurance; it's based on pooled risk. That's why we need everyone in on a national plan, like most countries. Medicare already has a lot of the infrastructure in place, the most logical path to universal healthcare is to expand Medicare; and it's far cheaper than what we're doing now. Raise my taxes $2K and save me $5K? That's pretty easy math, even cheat could figure it out.


I think they should rebrand it VA For All. Have you ever compared the middle-class tax rates in most of these countries who have a national plan to that of the United States? If so, do you still see this as a net win on your annual income? Belgium, Germany, Denmark, Austria, and Hungary have the highest income tax for singles, while Turkey, Denmark (again), Finland, The Netherlands, and Norway have the highest income tax for married couples with two children.

-------------------------
"The government who robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul," - George Bernard Shaw

“Don’t underestimate Joe’s ability to f—k things up.” - Barack Obama

“End of quote. Repeat the line.” - wise words from Joe Biden
 11/12/2019 06:11 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


RustyTruck

Posts: 33294
Joined Forum: 08/02/2004

Originally posted by: Cole

The most efficient system pools all risk, and operates at cost.



Doctors, hospitals, the Pharmaceutical Industry....at cost?


Yes.

@Snipe do you know what portion of those high Euro taxes are earmarked for the healthcare systems?

Australia for example has a 2% tax levy to fund it's system (also called Medicare BTW). It's not as comprehensive as Bernie's plan, but my colleagues there wouldn't trade it for our system.

-------------------------
Capitalism is based on the ridiculous notion that you can enjoy limitless growth in a closed, finite system.

In biology, such behavior of cells is called "cancer".
 11/12/2019 06:28 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Sniper

Posts: 8759
Joined Forum: 09/24/2003

If we are going to change our healthcare system, I would prefer a more consumer-driven approach that relies on transparency and competition, similar to what the Swiss have, whose government spending on health care is a fraction of their GDP when compared to ours. Government spending on health care in Switzerland is about 2.7% of GDP. Ours is close to 8%.

We need to give people the opportunity to be frugal with their healthcare choices and to be rewarded when they do so. Citizens also need to have some skin in the game.

A VA-For-All or Medicare-For-All option adds complexity and endless opportunity for bureaucratic bloat.

In order for this to work, Democrats would need to let go of a government-funded option and Republicans would need to let go of an employer-funded option. The government would need to demand transparency in the cost of the plans and standardization of the cost of procedures.

-------------------------
"The government who robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul," - George Bernard Shaw

“Don’t underestimate Joe’s ability to f—k things up.” - Barack Obama

“End of quote. Repeat the line.” - wise words from Joe Biden
 11/12/2019 08:37 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


RustyTruck

Posts: 33294
Joined Forum: 08/02/2004

Medicare now is a pretty efficient operation. Competition just adds cost and redundancy in an industry like healthcare. It's an essential service for all, and there should be no tolerance of profit motive.

If the system isn't government funded, and we get rid of the employer benefit model, how is it funded for those who aren't even paid a living wage?

-------------------------
Capitalism is based on the ridiculous notion that you can enjoy limitless growth in a closed, finite system.

In biology, such behavior of cells is called "cancer".
 11/12/2019 03:38 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


scombrid

Posts: 18018
Joined Forum: 07/24/2003

Originally posted by: Sniper
Originally posted by: RustyTruck Putting the sick into a separate group defeats the principle of insurance; it's based on pooled risk. That's why we need everyone in on a national plan, like most countries. Medicare already has a lot of the infrastructure in place, the most logical path to universal healthcare is to expand Medicare; and it's far cheaper than what we're doing now. Raise my taxes $2K and save me $5K? That's pretty easy math, even cheat could figure it out.
I think they should rebrand it VA For All. Have you ever compared the middle-class tax rates in most of these countries who have a national plan to that of the United States? If so, do you still see this as a net win on your annual income? Belgium, Germany, Denmark, Austria, and Hungary have the highest income tax for singles, while Turkey, Denmark (again), Finland, The Netherlands, and Norway have the highest income tax for married couples with two children.
Is 18k per year for insurance before you ever set foot in a doctor's office a net win for a median household?

-------------------------
...

 11/12/2019 03:41 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


scombrid

Posts: 18018
Joined Forum: 07/24/2003

Originally posted by: Sniper If we are going to change our healthcare system, I would prefer a more consumer-driven approach that relies on transparency and competition, similar to what the Swiss have, whose government spending on health care is a fraction of their GDP when compared to ours. Government spending on health care in Switzerland is about 2.7% of GDP. Ours is close to 8%. We need to give people the opportunity to be frugal with their healthcare choices and to be rewarded when they do so. Citizens also need to have some skin in the game. A VA-For-All or Medicare-For-All option adds complexity and endless opportunity for bureaucratic bloat. In order for this to work, Democrats would need to let go of a government-funded option and Republicans would need to let go of an employer-funded option. The government would need to demand transparency in the cost of the plans and standardization of the cost of procedures.
Everybody needs to let go of the employer funded option. The market distortion caused by decades of tax subsidies for employer provided care is one of the big factors that broke our market and made health care so expensive here. It is free market or single payer or bust.

-------------------------
...

Statistics
146494 users are registered to the 2nd Light Forums forum.
There are currently 3 users logged in to the forum.

FuseTalk Basic Edition - © 1999-2024 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.

First there was Air Jordan .